On Monday, October 2, the same day that the dubia of five cardinals and the corresponding response from Pope Francis were made public, the Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith also released the reply to a series of questions asked by Cardinal Dominik Duka on the administration of the Eucharist to divorced couples in a new union.
The Archbishop Emeritus of Prague (Czech Republic) addressed these 10 questions, also considered dubia (doubts, in Latin), to the Holy See on 13 July, 2023. On this occasion, he was the prefect of the Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith, Cardinal Víctor Fernández, the author of the answers, and not the Holy Father.
The questions posed by the Czech cardinal, and whose answers were approved by Pope Francis on 25 September, referring to some questions of Amoris laetitia, the apostolic exhortation of Pope Francis that has already raised in the past some “dubia” that were not received. answer.
Below, we share an unofficial translation of the questions posed by Cardinal Duka and the responses of the prefect of the Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith:
1. Is it possible for a diocese together with the Episcopal Conference to make decisions with total independence, referring to the facts mentioned in questions two and three?
The apostolic exhortation Amoris laetitia , a document of the ordinary papal magisterium, to which all are called to offer the gift of intelligence and will, states that priests have the task of ‘accompanying interested persons on the path of discernment according to the teaching of the Church and the guidelines of the bishop.” In this sense, it is possible, indeed it is desirable, for the Ordinary of a diocese to establish some criteria that, in line with the teaching of the Church, can help priests in the accompaniment and discernment of divorced people living in a new union.
2. Can Pope Francis’ response to the question from the pastoral section of the Diocese of Buenos Aires, given that the text was published in the Acta Apostolicae Sedis, be considered an affirmation of the ordinary Magisterium of the Church?
Como se indica en el rescripto que acompaña a los dos documentos en el Acta Apostolicae Sedis, estos se publican “like an authentic Magisterium”, es decir, como Magisterium authenticum.
3. Is this a decision of the ordinary Magisterium of the Church based on the document Amoris laetitia ?
As the Holy Father recalls in his letter to the Delegate of the Pastoral Region of Buenos Aires, Amoris laetitia has been the fruit of the work and prayer of the entire Church, with the mediation of two Synods and the Pope. This document is based on the Magisterium of the previous Pontiffs, who already recognized the possibility that divorced people in a new union could access the Eucharist, as long as they committed “to live in full continence, that is, to abstain from acts of of the spouses”, as John Paul II proposed, or to “commit to living their relationship… as friends”, as Benedict XVI proposed. Francis maintains the proposal of full continence for the divorced and remarried in a new union, but admits that there may be difficulties in practicing it and therefore allows in certain cases, after adequate discernment, the administration of the sacrament of Reconciliation even when there is no success in being faithful to the continence proposed by the Church.
4. Is it the intention of Amoris laetitia to institutionalize this solution through a permit or official decision to individual couples?
Point 1 of the document “Basic criteria for the application of chapter VIII of Amoris laetitia ” expressly says: “it is not appropriate to speak of ‘permissions’ to access the sacraments, but rather of a process of discernment accompanied by a pastor. It is a ‘personal and pastoral’ discernment (AL 300).” It is, therefore, a pastoral accompaniment as an exercise of the “via caritatis ”, which is nothing other than an invitation to follow the path “of Jesus: of mercy and integration”. Amoris laetitia opens the possibility of accessing to the sacraments of Reconciliation and the Eucharist when, in a particular case, there are limitations that mitigate responsibility and guilt.
On the other hand, this process of accompaniment does not necessarily end with the sacraments but can be oriented towards other forms of integration in the life of the Church: a greater presence in the community, participation in prayer or reflection groups, or involvement in various ecclesiastical services.
5. Who should be the evaluator of the given situation of the couples in question, a confessor, local parish priest, external vicar, episcopal or penitentiary vicar?
It is about starting an itinerary of pastoral accompaniment for the discernment of each individual person. Amoris laetitia emphasizes that all priests have the responsibility to accompany interested people on the path of discernment.
It is the priest who welcomes the person, listens to him attentively and shows him the maternal face of the Church, welcoming his right intention and his good will to put his entire life in the light of the Gospel and to practice charity. But it is each person, individually, who is called to stand before God and expose his conscience, with his possibilities and his limitations. This conscience, accompanied by a priest and illuminated by the guidelines of the Church, is called to be formed to evaluate and make a judgment sufficient to discern the possibility of accessing the sacraments.
6. Would it be appropriate for these cases to be dealt with by the competent Ecclesiastical Court?
In cases in which a declaration of nullity can be established, recourse to the Ecclesiastical Court will be part of the discernment process. The Holy Father wanted to simplify these processes through the “Motu proprio” Mitis iudex. The problem arises in more complex situations in which it is not possible to obtain a declaration of nullity. In these cases, a discernment process may also be possible that stimulates or renews the personal encounter with Jesus Christ also in the sacraments.
7. Can this principle apply to both parties in a civilly divorced marriage, or distinguish the degree of fault and proceed accordingly?
Saint John Paul II had already stated that “the judgment on the state of grace corresponds, naturally, only to the person concerned, since it is a judgment of conscience.” Therefore, it is a process of individual discernment in which “the divorced and remarried must ask themselves how they behaved with their children when the marital union went into crisis; whether there have been attempts at reconciliation; what is the situation of the couple abandoned; what consequences does the new relationship have for the rest of the family and the community of faithful; what example does it offer to young people who must prepare for marriage. Sincere reflection can strengthen confidence in the mercy of God, which is not denied to nobody”.
8. In the case of this individual permission, should it be understood that married life (the sexual aspect) should not be mentioned in the sacrament of reconciliation?
Even in the sacrament of marriage, the sexual life of spouses is subject to examination of conscience to confirm that it is a true expression of love and that it helps to grow in love. All aspects of life must be placed before God.
9. Would it not be convenient if the whole matter were better explained in the text of your competent dicastery?
Based on the words of the Holy Father in his response letter to the Delegate of the Regional Pastoral of Buenos Aires, in which it was stated that there are no other interpretations, it seems that the matter is sufficiently explained in the aforementioned document.
10. How to proceed to establish internal unity, but also not to disturb the ordinary Magisterium of the Church?
It would be convenient for the Episcopal Conference to agree on minimum criteria to put into practice the proposals of Amoris Laetitia, which help priests in the processes of accompaniment and discernment regarding the possible access to the sacraments of some divorced people in a new union, without prejudice of the legitimate authority that each Bishop has in his own diocese.
(Translated from ACI Prensa)